craven
You were just waiting for some opportunity to use the Bush/sex change line.
Well, Sadaam won't go to Guantanamo...that would shine too bright a light on the goings on there. They could try him by military court, but I agree, turning him over is the pretty certain decision.
blatham wrote:craven
You were just waiting for some opportunity to use the Bush/sex change line.
Nah, that was an afterthought.
Quote:Well, Sadaam won't go to Guantanamo...that would shine too bright a light on the goings on there. They could try him by military court, but I agree, turning him over is the pretty certain decision.
Looks certain to be an Iraqi court and my only question is whether it will be televised.
I think it will.
Actually I hadn't noticed any dig at Rumsfeld or whatever.
That people and democratic political leaders generally will find reason to be pleased in the final fall of a dictator such as Saddam is obvious, and hardly deserving of comment. It is also likely that our government is already in posession of physical evidence of French violations of the UN sanctions regime against Saddam, for example French made munitions manufactured during the last seven years. Saddam may open the door to a greater understanding and more vividly communicable facts. I can't estimate the likelihood, but it is a real possibility. It will be interesting to observe the unfolding statements and actions of our 'friends' in Old Europe.
Ah - I see that Craven already dealt with that.
On the other hand, ebrown posted on the parallel thread: "Is anyone else surprised that Saddam was captured alive instead of killed." Good thing to point out that he was. That should put an end to the conspiracy theories about how the US was out to have him dead and not speak, etc.
Talking about a dead Saddam, though - if it's either the Iraqis or the Americans who are going to try him (or a combination) - the Americans have a death penalty, do the Iraqis too? Might he get the death penalty, at the end of the process and when he's heard about everything people would want him to testify about? Would it be a good thing if he did?
I'm an opponent of the death penalty, and I think sentencing him to death would set a bad precedent that would make it harder for (international) tribunals to get their hands on future war criminals / tyrants - BUT, if there was ever anyone who deserved it ... Plus, imagine Iraq having to keep him in jail - inside Iraq - forever - the attempts to help him escape one would always have to defend against ... the always lingering threat that in some future civil war, the jail doors would open and he'd be back ... the threat that he'd function as a martyr to some, especially if he's in an Iraqi jail while the Americans rule the country ... <shudder>.
I know this is going to sound awful, but in many ways it would be better if, at the end of the trials that will undoubtedly follow, Saddam wouldnt be there anymore. Though its true - an execution can unleash a backlash as well, of course.
For now, I guess, we have a very long trial to look forward to! Because everyone will benefit from that ... the longer the trial, the more info the Iraqi people might get about the crimes committed during his regime (even perhaps about the fate of family members and friends who disappeared) ... and of course, the longer the trial, the more of a PR boon to Bush in the road to elections.
Quote:It will be interesting to observe the unfolding statements and actions of our 'friends' in Old Europe.
That is a pretty tired old hobby horse you are riding, george...
georgeob1 wrote:It is also likely that our government is already in posession of physical evidence of French violations of the UN sanctions regime against Saddam, for example French made munitions manufactured during the last seven years.
Why do you say this? Much "evidence" of that that was thus far touted has been shown to be false and was retracted. In fact Poland issued an apology to France for the misidentification of the missle batch numbers that led may to tout that France was supplying Rolands this year.
Polish Defense Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski said he "deplored the indications concerning the date the missiles were produced."
The error was absurd, they were reading the date of manufacture as the expiration date and dating the Rolands based on that elementary error.
See:
http://www1.gazeta.pl/swiat/1,34209,1706281.html
Given this track record for absurd error I really wonder what the "Frenchies are selling weapons to Saddam" crowd can come up with.
Lola suggests Johnnie Cochran as defence counsel.
georgeob1 wrote:It is also likely that our government is already in posession of physical evidence of French violations of the UN sanctions regime against Saddam, for example French made munitions manufactured during the last seven years.
It will be interesting to observe the unfolding statements and actions of our 'friends' in Old Europe.
George, really
You have heard of international weapon trade, have you? Or should our local police claim the USA that three days ago a man was shot here with a US manufactured weapon and US amunition - although it is forbidden to sell weapons to criminals?
Re statements from Europe:
Quote:The anti-war European axis of France, Germany and Belgium all welcomed the capture.
French President Jacques Chirac, "is rejoicing in the arrest of Saddam Hussein," his spokeswoman said, while German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder sent a telegram of congratulations to Bush.
"I hope that his arrest will help the efforts of the international community in the reconstruction and stabilisation of Iraq," it read.
Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said in a statement: "This arrest will no doubt have a favourable influence on the stabilisation and internal security of Iraq."
Foreign Minister Ana Palacio of US-ally Spain described the arrest as a "great day for humanity and for the freedom of the Iraqi people."
source
nimh wrote:
Well, the truth is, of course we are - and some of us (though admittedly not Chirac) opposed him already when you people were still doing business with him. Chirac was never rooting for Saddam - he just didnt agree with your way of dealing with him. How hard is that to get?
This is not up to your usual standards. France and Russia were the major suppliers of weapons to Saddam throughout his reign. Both countries were also the principal beneficiaries of contracts for the development of oil reserves in Iraq, some contracts signed after the last Gulf War. The U.S. took some actions to keep Iraq from folding during its war with Iran: that was a case of not wanting either side in that conflict to emerge as a triumphant victor: we had very little trade or economic interest in Saddam.
I'm thinking that right this very minute, some white house policy wonk is maddly writing a tack-on to some bill on softwood or school cafeterias which will legalize cloning so that Spencer Tracy can handle the televised prosecution.
Quote:and of course, the longer the trial, the more of a PR boon to Bush in the road to elections.
Jesus, nimh, I think you've got it here. These boys are media smart and quite aware of how such a trial, like OJ's, would fill the airwaves, drowning out anything else of substance. You're a smart cookie.
Walter,
So good to read the pious statements from the French and Belgian governments. Spain, however, is another matter and should not be associated with them.
Perhaps Belgium will try Saddam: their courts claim universal jurisdiction.
That's why I am fairly certain it will be televised.
I hope this does not bring back the Iraqi death penalty.
And Bush is to speak at noon. What to watch for...
"This is a huge blow against terrorism"
georgeob1 wrote:Perhaps Belgium will try Saddam: their courts claim universal jurisdiction.
I'm not certain but I think this is a dated statement.
Didn't Belgium rethink their jurisdiction?
georgeob1 wrote:
Perhaps Belgium will try Saddam: their courts claim universal jurisdiction.
Belgium is democratic country - not courts, but parliament (and elected government) makes the laws there.
Besides, they changed it.
[Edited. Writing ('real') christmas cards and answering here highens the typo rate - on both subjects! :wink: ]
Quote:"Saddam is gone from power. He won't be coming back, that the Iraqi people now know and it is they who will decide his fate."
So, that's what Blair said today.
nimh wrote:the Americans have a death penalty, do the Iraqis too?
The US suspended the Iraqi death penalty.
blatham wrote:And Bush is to speak at noon. What to watch for...
"This is a huge blow against terrorism"
Well, Blatham, what would YOU have him say? Do you think this event enhanced terrorism? All your Rove, conspiracy stuff seems oddly misplaced. Why is it so difficult for you to directly engage the fact that Saddam's capture is a good thing in its own right?
